Respond to at least two of your peers’ postings in one or more of the following ways: See attachment for detail instructions?
Respond to at least two of your peers' postings in one or more of the following ways: See attachment for detail instructions
- 3 -4 paragraphs
- No plagiarism
- APA citing
Top of Form
Discussion: Managing Conflict in a Positive Way
Entering into conflict often evokes sports analogies. Whether it is an individual or a team sport, the automatic reaction is to imagine that someone is going to win, and someone is going to lose. Changing this mindset takes a conscious effort. This reframing has to shift years of attitudes based on experience with little knowledge of conflict cycles and processes. You may not be familiar with the works of Napoleon Hill (1960) who wrote Think and Grow Rich, but his entire premise was that a positive mental attitude is a prerequisite for success. In conflicts, this attitude is called a “win-win mindset.”
When we adopt a win-win mindset, we have to consider the content issue from the perspective of both parties to the conflict, much as we did last week in the Dynamics of Trust Model. A natural outgrowth of that model is looking at face and how we ensure that both parties are respected and valued throughout the conflict interactions. When we disrespect, intentionally or unintentionally, corrective face management provides strategies to restore positive relations. We accept responsibility for our behavior and apologize with remorse and sincerity.
More than that, however, we must also create a climate that supports a positive conflict interaction. This means creating a positive psychological atmosphere in which to engage in conflict. How do you transform an adversarial relationship into a cooperative one? Are you willing to approach the other as an equal, regardless of status and power differences, and use your power responsibly? Yes, you have power! You are expected to use it for good in a positive conflict scenario. Even if the climate is initially harmful, these strategies will help convert them into nurturing ones. People change and grow when they feel safe; therefore, it will benefit both to have a positive climate.
To assist with responding to colleagues, pay particular attention to the following Learning Resources:
· Kaczmarek, D. S. (2010). Pulling back the curtain on “See attachment”
· Conflict Management Lessons –
· Buschlen, E. L., & Reusch, J. (2016). The assessment of service – “See attachment”
· Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2014). Constructive controversy as a means – “See attachment”
· Defensive and Supportive Climates – https://youtu.be/2e1eVdgbm8M
Cahn, D. D., & Abigail, R. A. (2014). Managing conflict through communication (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Bottom of Form
Assignment:
Respond to at least two of your peers' postings in one or more of the following ways:
· Use resources from the Defensive and Supportive Climates to gauge your peer, indicating whether each element was more defensive or supportive. Provide support for your rating.
· Share your thoughts on the verbiage used in the description of the conflict your peer presented and whether those were powerful, powerless, or neutral? What impact do you think verbiage has on building a positive climate for conflict? Give examples of how the verbiage could be more neutral.
· Given what you have learned from analyzing your peer’s conflict scenario and thinking about the conflict scenario that you described, what would you do differently in a similar scenario? Are there ways that you might use your power more responsibly?
· 3 -4 paragraphs
· No plagiarism
· APA citing
1st Colleague – Natasha Mills
Natasha Mills
Discussion: Managing Conflict in a Positive Way
Top of Form
The conflict that I was personally involved in was one between me and another manager who strongly felt that his team was more qualified to undertake a critical project that my team had been assigned. During the presentation of the different milestones of the project, the manager made it his mandate to frustrate our efforts since he was a part of the panel that was monitoring the progress of the project and providing feedback for its successful completion. After one particular presentation, I decided to confront the manager because he was demoralizing my team about the project through his constant criticisms even when the rest of the panel commended my team for the work we were doing. When I confronted the manager, I entered the conflict with a win-lose mindset. I wanted the manager to know that he was not going to be assigned the project, particularly when we had made significant progress, and that he should just accept that and back off from demoralizing my team. However, from the learning resources, I have learned that I could have changed this mindset to be a win-win. Kaczmarek (2010) says that negotiations do not have to be win-lose. Instead, the negotiating parties can get not only some of what they wanted but more. I should have adopted this mindset when entering the conflict for more positive outcomes and to save the relationship between the manager and I. For instance, I could have proposed to the manager that I would seek his help with the project and collaborate with his team. This way, we could have had a more successful project by surpassing its goals, involved the manager and given him credit for the part he and his team played, and saved our relationship.
During the conflict, the face management technique that was widely applied was corrective. The manager was competitive and frequently used face-threatening comments as feedback during my presentation of the milestones of the project. I believed that the intention of the manager was to portray my team and I as incompetent for the project so that he would be assigned. This negatively affected the outcome of the conflict because I perceived the manager as the enemy, which was similar to the way he saw me because I had taken on a project that he thought was meant for him. “People’s beliefs about the other’s intent affect the conflict strategies they choose and how they interpret the other’s strategies” (Cahn & Abigail, 2014, p.165). the result was a damaged relationship between the manager and I due to our inability to effectively manage the conflict.
The conflict climate in this situation was harmful. Such a conflict climate is usually characterized by negative and destructive results, which was the outcome of our conflict issue (Cahn & Abigail, 2014). The harmful conflict climate was caused by the manager’s abuse of power. The manager was part of the panel that provided feedback and monitored the progress of the project. He used his position to serve his self-interests, which was to sabotage my team’s reputation about its competence in completing the project so that he could take over. The result was a competitive escalation cycle. I chose to meet his force with force by confronting him competitively, which are factors that create a harmful conflict climate and lead to negative results, such as the damage of the relationship between the manager and I in our conflict (Cahn & Abigail, 2014). Therefore, it is possible to state that the imbalance of power, where the manager was in a more powerful position regarding issues affecting the conflict, increased the intensity of the conflict.
Hagemann & Stroop (2012) identify various conflict management and resolution strategies that apply to the conflict issue I have described. The most applicable strategies that I intend to apply in future conflicts as a manager and leader include talking it out, negotiating, and compromise. Talking it out is important because it preserves relationships by eliminating the build-up of resentment, leading to effective conflict management (Hagemann & Stroop, 2012). Based on this fact, as well as the experience I had with this skill during the described conflict, I intend to apply it a lot in future conflict situations. However, I will practice the skill using the cooperative rather than the competitive approach for positive results. Negotiation is also an important skill that should be applied to most, if not all conflict situations. Hagemann & Stroop (2012) identify various settings where the skill of negotiation can be used and I believe that it would have been helpful in managing the described conflict more effectively because it would have allowed us to achieve a win-win outcome. The last important skill is compromise. Compromise involves giving up something in the event of conflict for more positive outcomes (Hagemann & Stroop, 2012). Compromise would have been useful in resolving the conflict between the manager and I for better results. For instance, I could have compromised and worked collaboratively with the manager during the project instead of letting my ego take over, leading to a damaged relationship.
Cahn, D. D., & Abigail, R. A. (2014). Managing conflict through communication (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Hagemann, B., & Stroope, S. (2012). Conflict management: Lessons from the second grade. Talent Development, 66(7), 58–61.
Kaczmarek, D. S. (2010). Pulling back the curtain on “getting to yes.” Healthcare Purchasing News, 34(5), 64.
Bottom of Form
2nd Colleague – Donna Tizzano
Donna Tizzano
Discussion – Week 3 Tizzano Initial Response
Top of Form
Dr. Fisher and Class
Recently, I had to assume day to day management of our Medical Emergency Department (MED). The caregivers in this area had a reputation for strong, aggressive personalities and behaviors they often demonstrated to other disciplines and at times, reflected in poor customer service to patients. The previous manager lacked strong leadership skills and did not hold caregivers accountable. She also maintained friendships with select subordinates and favored these people when scheduling or when there were conflicts. The secretary in the department was one of the manager’s friends and who often stepped out of her boundaries as secretary, triaging patients, taking VS, giving directions to ancillary staff, and delegating tasks that were not within her scope of responsibility. On a hectic and stressful day, the secretary got into an argument with a patient and family member because another patient was brought back to the department from the waiting room before the other person. The secretary got into a heated argument with the patient and family member and screamed at them, “if you don’t like it, then leave and leave now”. I was called to the department by a nurse to provide service recovery and address the behaviors of the secretary. When I arrived to the department, I completed service recovery in the waiting room and found the secretary crying in the staff lounge and sobbing that everyone makes her do everything and that she couldn’t do it all, “it’s not my fault”.
My mindset on the way to MED was a win-lose mindset. My primary intent was to resolve the Customer Service issues and ensure that all patients were managed and cared for appropriately. My next thought was to deal with the behaviors of the secretary authoritatively. This response would create a harmful conflict climate between the secretary and me because I was so frustrated with her behaviors (Cahn & Abigail, 2014). Although legitimate power exists in the relationship of boss and employee, I chose not to confront the secretary at this time because of the heightened emotions involved. I told the secretary that it would be best for her to go home and that we would talk on Monday morning. Hagemann and Stroope (2012) encourage temporary conflict avoidance if the setting or time is not appropriate to achieve a win-win resolution. By temporarily avoiding the conflict, I was able to control the climate and establish a win- win mindset when I met with the secretary.
Monday morning, I met with the secretary in my office, but chose to sit across from her in a chair instead of behind my desk. Since there was already legitimate power in this situation by virtue of my title, I chose to de-emphasize the difference in our rank because I did not want to invoke a climate where the caregiver would become defensive (Chan & Abigail, 2014). My goal was to create a supportive climate by focusing on the issue of the conflict and what had occurred, not on my authoritative position (Cahn & Abigail, 2014). This strategy successfully set a neutral tone during the meeting and demonstrated concern for what caused the employee to act in the manner that she did.
I opened the conversation by sharing how busy it was in the MED recently, especially last Friday. I shared how challenging it must be to consistently coordinate activity at the nurse’s station, answer phones, address people approaching the desk, and manage activity and questions from the people in the waiting room while maintaining calm, and demonstrating proficient Customer Service skills. My intent was to create a nurturing environment, eliminate defensive behaviors and provide support through empathy by acknowledging the challenges she faced in her role (Cahn & Abigail, 2014).
I then asked the secretary to share her perception of the events and her thoughts on how she could have assisted in de-escalating the situation. The secretary was very forthcoming with the part she played in escalating the situation and even provided alternative ways to have handled the situation to have reached a better outcome. She apologized for her unprofessional behavior that had escalated the situation to the point it did. The secretary then continued the conversation by explaining how she is often overwhelmed since people ask her to do things outside of her role. When she tries to help, she gets behind in her job responsibilities and then becomes stressed and lashes out at peers and those around her. Hearing this, I realized that the secretary’s image of herself, or face, was that she was the glue that held the MED together and who strived to meet the needs of everyone, but due to the constant activity, chaos, and interruptions from people pulling her in multiple directions, she felt that she was now ineffective in her role. In this situation, I used preventative face management to avoid threatening her face perception. I chose to see the issue from the secretary’s perspective and accepted her explanation of the event and reflection on how this made her feel (Cahn & Abigail, 2014). In choosing this strategy, it allowed me to save face by demonstrating respect and support for the secretary and the willingness to work out a positive outcome to the conflict.
I could have chosen to issue a Corrective Action for non-compliance with the Core Values of our hospital to handle this conflict. Handling the situation in this manner would have demonstrated not only an abuse of power, but it would have created a harmful climate where we were unable to establish a foundation of trust nor achieve a satisfactory resolution to the conflict (Cahn & Abigail, 2014). In choosing to provide a supportive climate where I provided an opportunity for a non-threatening conversation, I was able to share the department’s goals, clarify the secretaries’ responsibilities, and what she would be held accountable for moving forward. This climate also allowed discussion about personal growth opportunities for her in the future, ultimately leading to a mutually satisfactory outcome of the conflict.
Hagemann and Stroope (2012) teach us that conflict management is a learned skill, and if the appropriate tools are utilized, we will learn to manage conflict situations effectively. These authors provide several different tools to manage conflict depending on the specific situation. In the situation I described, I initially used avoidance since it was not a good time to address the issue when patient care was a priority, and the emotions the individual demonstrated were not conducive to productive communication. When the situation was addressed, the climate was more favorable for transparent communication and talking the problem out one on one, another effective tool that Hagemann and Stroope (2012) advise using in conflict resolution. By allowing a couple of days to pass before addressing the conflict, we could discuss the situation in a non-threatening manner and achieve a much better outcome than we would have if addressed the day the situation happened.
Other tools that Hagemann and Stroope (2012) identify and that I have personally found to be very effective in conflict management and resolution are the art of apology where you take responsibility for your actions or errors and provide a sincere apology. One of my traits is to “own my mistakes”, which has served me well in resolving past conflict situations. Humor is another tool that I have used because it can alleviate tension and put people at ease when used at the appropriate time. Sharing information and transparency is another tool that Hagemann and Stroope (2012) share that I find effective. When communication is transparent and shared within an organization, it facilitates a culture of trust and engagement. Another valiable tool is the art of negotiation, where if used effectively, creates a win-win outcome for both parties (Hagemann & Stroope, 2012). I am a member of our hospital negotiation team and have assisted in negotiating several contracts for the two different bargaining units that represent our caregivers. When approached in a non-adversarial manner, discussion, compromise, and cooperation, results in a mutually agreed upon contract. In my role as Director of Acute and Critical Care, I have over 100 direct and indirect reports and 13 areas of responsibility. Learning about the conflict management tools described by Hagemann and Stroope (2012) I will be able to apply the appropriate tool to each specific conflict situation I encounter and hopefully, achieve a mutually agreed upon resolution.
Have a great week,
Donna
References:
Cahn, D. D., & Abigail, R. A. (2014). Managing conflict through communication (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Hagemann, B., & Stroope, S. (2012). Conflict management: Lessons from the second grade. Talent Development, 66(7), 58–61.
Bottom of Form
,
BACK TALK Pulling back the curtain on 'getting to yes' Best practice: Negotiating from a win-win perspective
r • ' by David S. Kaczmarek, FAHRMM, CMRP I
O ne key skill set of a supply chain executive or anyone from the pur- chasing side of the supply chain
is the ability to negotiate. There are few successful supply chain professionals who do not possess this skill.
But there is a differentiator that separates the good negotiators from the best. That is the ability to negotiate from a "win-win" perspective. Best practice supply chain executives have mastered this skill and use it frequently.
Win-win negotiation is one of those concepts that appears self-evident. Isn't it obvious? If I negotiate so that 1 get some or most of what I wanted and you get some of what you wanted, we hoth win, right? The negotiation is successful, right? Unfortunately, that is the understanding most people – those who haven't studied the concept – have of win-win negotiation. The reality is far different.
The concepts of win-win negotiation come from the Harvdrd Negotiation Project and date back to the 197()s. This is not a new concept by any means. The theory behind the concept is that negotiations do not have to be a zero sum game. Most negotiations are adversarial, where eacli party tries to get tbe other party to move towards their position at the expense of the other party's position.
Instead, win-win posits that by following five basic principies the parties can both get more value than either expected to get through the normal adversarial process. It's not that we both get some of what we wanted – it's tliat we both get more. That is the magic of win-win.
The five principles of win-win negotia- tion are: • Cooperation. This is the guiding principle
from which all tlie others flow. Tlie parties must position themselves as partners in a search for a solution that is beneficial to hoth. While there are techniques that an experienced negotiator can use to engen-
der this cooperative spirit, at some point it must exist for win-win to be successful.
• People, not problems. People must be separated from the problem. Each negotiation is conducted at two levels, the substantive and the interpersonal. We cannot let our egos and need to win get in the way of finding a solution. By understanding the normal human emo- tions and drivers and developing an empathy with the other party, we can move the negotiation, along. By the end of the negotiation the relationship between the parties should be better than when it began.
• Interests, not positions. In most negotia- tions the sides take positions and try to get tlie other side to accept their positions. But each side has many interests that are driv- ing the positions. Wliile the positions they select will satisfy many of their interests, rarely will they satisfy all or even most. In fact most of us don't even realize all the interests we have. By understanding your interests and discovering the other party's interests we set the stage for the fourth principle.
• Creative options. This is where you brain- storm to find many different solutions that may satisfy both parties. In particu- lar, you look for small concessions from one party that will have greater value for the other. As each side gives up little things in exchange for big things the value to each grows.
• Objective standards. Finally, win-win negotiators look for fairness. This can be demonstrated by pointing to fair standards – things that are independent of will and both legitimate and practical, and using fair procedures – those that both parties agree treat them both equally, Tliese basics of win-win negotiation are
fairly simple. To learn more 1 encourage you to read the original book on the subjet t, "Getting to Yes: Negotiating AgreemenI Without Giving" by Roger Fisher and Wil liam Ury (1981). The follow-up book by William Ury, "Getting Past No: Negotiatinj; With Difficult People" (TWl) will give yon even more insight.
But learningabout win-win is not the same as using it. This "simple" technique takes lots of practice to enable one to use it effectively. It can be a lot of work trying to negotiate from a win-win perspective, especially if the other party does not want to or just does not understand it. It may seem easier to revert back to a more comfortable styk Don't allov' this to liappen. The benefits of using win-win are just too substantial to ignore.
Whether you are trying to get the latest generationPETscanner, working with phy- sicians to lower the cost of spine implants. dealing with staff unrest or discussing attendance at a boy/girl party with your pre-teen, using win-win techniques will result in a better outcome. Join the ranks of the exceptional best practice negotiators. Learn – and use – win-win negotiation techniques. HPN
David S. Kaczmarek. FAHRMM, CMRr, is a Derry, NH-based director at Wellsprin-i Partners, a Huron Couíiilím^ Group Practice, Chicago. Kaczmarek has more thai 25 year– experience in healthcare admiiiii^tration ami material? management, including director positions at several hospitals and systems. He can be readied via e-mail at dkaczmarekióí huronconsiiltinggroup.com.
64 M a y 2010 – HEÄLIHCÄRE PURCHASING N€WS • wwvi/.hpnonline.com
Copyright of Healthcare Purchasing News is the property of KSR Publishing and its content may not be copied
or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
,
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ujcc20
Journal of College and Character
ISSN: 2194-587X (Print) 1940-1639 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ujcc20
The Assessment of Service Through the Lens of Social Change Leadership: A Phenomenological Approach
Eric Lee Buschlen & Jonathan Reusch
To cite this article: Eric Lee Buschlen & Jonathan Reusch (2016) The Assessment of Service Through the Lens of Social Change Leadership: A Phenomenological Approach, Journal of College and Character, 17:2, 82-100, DOI: 10.1080/2194587X.2016.1159224
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/2194587X.2016.1159224
Published online: 18 May 2016.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 1075
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Citing articles: 2 View citing articles
The Assessment of Service Through the Lens of Social Change Leadership: A Phenomenological Approach
Eric Lee Buschlen, Central Michigan Universitya
Jonathan Reusch, Oakland Universityb
Abstract
Service to others plays a key role in the development of one’s worldview. To study this key role, authors examined a sample of 38 student narratives in three phases: before, during, and 45 days after they served at an alternative break site around the United States. Students kept a prompt-based journal inspired by the tenets of the social change model of leadership. Key themes identified in this project outline participants’ democratic approach to team conflict, the development of an activist persona, and an enhanced focus on personal privilege. This qualitative project promotes adding the student voice to the quantitative measures that are more commonly reported through annual programmatic assessment reports. This approach should better outline the depth of student learning in similar co-curricular programs with a complimentary goal of programmatic enhancement.
“It was the greatest experience of my life,” a student reflected after returning from a week-long service trip. But what does that really mean? It is often assumed that students who engage in long-term service projects (like alternative breaks) are positively transformed in the process. However, what is the best way to share their stories and assess student learning? The answer is through structured qualitative research. More often, considerable numbers and percentages are reported by higher education institutions through year-end reports outlining the number of hours served, number of sites served, or even a per hour cash equivalency is noted for the related service act (Buschlen, 2013). The student experience is often lost in these measures. To examine this phenomenon, student narratives were collected through prompt-based journaling before, during, and 45 days after students served at an alternative break site in the United States. Seider (2013) suggested examining participant expectations prior to the service event, and this project followed that suggestion. By examining the expectations and more thoroughly understanding the reasons why students
aEric L. Buschlen ([email protected]) is an associate professor in the Department of Educational Leadership at Central Michigan University. His research interests include service acts as leadership development, leadership education, and youth leadership development. bJonathan Reusch (reus[email protected]) is an academic adviser and adjunct instructor working in the First Year Advising Center at Oakland University. His research interests including mentoring, alternative breaks impacts, and faculty tenure factors in the academic profession.
82 Peer Reviewed Article
Journal of College & Character VOLUME 17, No. 2, May 2016
doi:10.1080/2194587X.2016.1159224 http://journals.naspa.org/jcc © NASPA 2016 JCC
desire to seek social change in the world, educators can be able to build a more focused curriculum that drives the goals of that college or university (Johnson, 2014).
Two pilot data collections w
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.
